Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-09-19
THE NEVADA BANK.
How Much ft is Involved In the
wheat Deal.

Wheat Deals
The San Francisco papers are pub
fishing broadsides full of figures ant
facts-so called-as to the amount O
money the Nevada Bank is involved
by the great Dresbach wheat deal. Il
Is well known that the bank is instant
in the denial that it is involved at all
Knowing that the public are intensely
interested in the matter, HERALI
reporter, learning that Mr.. w. w
Moreland, one of the bank commits
sioners, is in the city and stop ing al
the Nadeau, last night secured an in.
terview with him on this topic, the
results of which are given below. Mr.
Moreland states that the Commission
made careful inspection as to the
affairs of the Nevada Bank in May and
September, and that on July Ist the
bank rendered a sworn statement to
the Commission. In reply to the aues-
ton, "How did the bank stand at the
time of your last visit?" Mr.. More
land said:
The Bank Commissioners examined
the affairs of the Nevada Bank as they
stood at the close OF business on the
9Th of September. AS various rumors
had been afoat as to the amount of
money that institution had loaned to
certain parties engaged in the buying
of wheat, during this year and prior
to the 25th of August, they paid par
ticular attention to that class of loans,
and to the amount of warehouse re-
ceipts for wheat deposited by bor-
rowers to secure payment of money
borrowed by them from the bank.
They allowed the bank the sum of
$50 per ton for the wheat pledged, and
a reasonable amount for the ships,
lands, mortgages, coal etc., pledged
by the parties who borrowed the
money, and after such allowance found
that John Rosenfeld owed the bank
$661 900 which was not secured, and
also found that Vim. Dresbach owed
them 1927 900 which was not secured.
They also found about $47 900 of debts
Of other parties which was not, in the
opinion of the Commissioners, amply
secured. They, therefore, informed
the vice-president, Mr.. Brander, that
they proposed to write off the
sum OF 81 ,236,O0O from the as
sets Of the bank. Mr..
Brander thereupon said that the stock
holders of the bank, rather than see
that amount written off, and the
standing Of the bank affected, would
make up and pay in to the bank the
amount Of losses on the wheat as
found by the Commission, to-wit:
81 ,189, 900, which was done in the
presence of the Commission, and the
accounts fixed SO as to show the
proper credits. The sum of 1000
spoken of above was not made good
and the Commissioners therefore
wrote it off Of the assets of the bank.
Question-What about the state
ment that Charles +. Reed guaran-
teed the payment of over $1,000 900
to the bank, borrowed from it by Dres-
bach?
Answcr-We found one note of Dres-
bach's to the bank for the sum of $780,
600 endorsed by Reed, and that is the
only paper signed by Reed, to my
which We found in the
bank. We certainly found no note or
notes or guarantees OF Reeds to the
bank for Dresbach for the sum
of $1,000, 900, or any other
sum except the $4,000 spoken Of
above. Any banker will tell you,
after looking at the statements Of that
bank for May, June and September,
that it would be impossible for it to
loan out OF the legitimate assets of the
bank the additional sum Of $4,000, 900
to any person or persons. 1t would
more than exhaust its resources to do
80. My own opinion is that the sum of
81 ,1S9 1000 spoken of above is the total
amount that bank lost on the wheat
deal, provided, of course, our calcula-
lions as to the value OF securities is
Ques.-What was the total amount
borrowed by Rosenfeld and Dresbach
from the bank, as found by your ex-
Ans.-Mr. Rosenfeld owed on that
day, without interest, storage, insur-
ance, etc., the sum of 81 $4,000. OF
that amount $500, 900 was secured by
a gentleman whom we considered
good. Of the balance we considered
1873, 900 amply secured, and $661 900
not secured. l do not remember the
exact amount Dresbach owed, but
think it was about 1886, 900. Of that
amount we considered $527 600 not
secured.